C.Venkatesan v. The Secretary

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 25.08.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN C.Venkatesan ... Petitioner Vs.

1.The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry Parrys, Chennai-600 001 2.K.M.Saravanan (MS 2015/2005) Advocate & Notary Public No.A2/309, Meignana Vasantham Tower, Auxilium College Road, 4th East Cross Road, Gandhi Nagar, Katpadi, Vellore-632 006.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to dispose of the complaint dated 17.05.2025 within a specific period of time prescribed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sunil Kumar For Respondents : Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar for R1 Mr.K.Venkatasubban for M/s.Sarvabhauman Associates for R2

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH.J,) This Writ Petition has been filed to direct the first respondent to dispose of the petitioner's complaint dated 17.05.2025.

2. In the complaint made by the petitioner to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry dated 17.05.2025, his grievance appears to be that the legal opinion rendered by the second respondent / Advocate had misguided him to buy a property, in which he later found certain entries of encumbrances. According to the petitioner, since the second respondent had opined that there were no encumbrance over the property, he proceeded with the purchase and subsequently, sustained loss, which, according to him, amounts to professional misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961.

3. We do not agree with the reasoning adopted by the petitioner in his representation. The professional service rendered by the second respondent was only an opinion given by him in the exercise of his professional duties. An erroneous opinion by itself cannot constitute a misconduct. While that being so, we find no reason to entertain the prayer sought for in the present Writ Petition, wherein the petitioner seeks for expeditious disposal of his complaint.

4. Accordingly, the Writ Petition stands dismissed. No Costs. [M.S.R., J] [V.L.N., J] 25.08.2025 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Anu

M.S.RAMESH, J.

and V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN , J.

Anu To 1.The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry Parrys, Chennai-600 001 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

25.08.2025